Wallabies Scrummaging Woes

Scott Allen June 27, 2012 42

No Gravatar

Watching the game on Saturday I was alarmed at how poorly the Wallabies scrum was performing. And watching a replay on Sunday it didn’t seem any better. Now I’ve taken a closer look, it was even worse than I initially thought.

Firstly, let me repeat my usual warning on the folly of relying on statistics alone to justify any argument you choose to make on any topic in rugby. Depending on which sources you use for statistics, you’ll probably get a different result from each and even then, just because the statistics are published on a website or flashed up on your television screen it doesn’t necessarily mean they are correct or tell you the whole picture.

Let’s look at the scrum statistics from Saturday’s game from some different sources:

Rugby Stats Website (Sports Data) Fox Sports Website ESPN Website My Count
Scrums Set With Wallabies Feed - - - 4
Scrums Re-set - - - 1
Scrums Decided 1 1 3 3
Scrums Won 1 1 2 1
Scrums Won – Pen / FK - - - 1
Scrums Lost - - 1 -
Scrums Lost – Pen / FK - - - 1
% Won 100% 100% 67% 67%
Scrums Set With Wales Feed - - - 11
Scrums Re-set - - - 3
Scrums Decided 3 3 9 8
Scrums Won 3 3 9 2
Scrums Won – Pen / FK - - - 6
Scrums Lost - - - -
Scrums Lost – Pen / FK - - - -
% Won 100% 100% 100% 100%

It should be no surprise that the Sports Data and FOXSports numbers are the same, as Sports Data lists FOXSports as one of its clients. ESPN’s data comes from Stuart Farmer, who used to provide the statistics to Planet Rugby. I don’t have the time available to record full statistics for each game any more so this is just my count from watching the game.

Overall my numbers are in line with ESPN’s, except for one extra scrum they recorded for Wales. I may simply have missed one, but I can’t find the ninth scrum they recorded. I presume that the difference to the Sports Data numbers is because ESPN only recorded scrums that were not decided with a penalty or free kick. If that is the case, I don’t follow the rationale behind that method and it doesn’t really give an indication of what happened.

If you relied on statistics alone and used the data from either of the first two websites, you’d think all was well with the Wallabies scrum. After all, they won 100% on their own feed, the same as Wales! If you use the data from ESPN, you’d be a little concerned with a winning percentage of 66.67%, but given that was over just three scrums, it doesn’t look too bad. However, a look at any of those first three columns of statistics doesn’t give the real picture.

Even without viewing any footage from the game, more detailed statistics would get you asking further questions regarding the number of scrums reset and the number of scrums determined by a penalty or free kick. That doesn’t apply so much to scrums on the Wallabies’ feed because I don’t see those numbers as being too far away from what you’d expect from only three scrums awarded. However, the more detailed numbers when Wales were feeding the ball show 3 of 11 scrums set were reset (27.27%) and 6 of the 8 scrums decided (75.00%) resulted in a penalty or free kick to Wales. Certainly the percentage of penalties and free kicks awarded to Wales on their feed indicates that the referee believed the Wallabies had significant problems with their scrum, and I can’t disagree with him.

So let’s dig further. Of the six Welsh scrums decided by penalty or free kick, two were free kicks for the Wallabies engaging early. In addition, the only scrum the Wallabies lost on their own feed was a third free kick against them for the same offence. Digging further again, two of those three offences occurred when the starting front row was on the field for the Wallabies, and the last in the first scrum packed with Alexander and Moore on as replacements. The first early call came in the first scrum of the game on the Wallabies’ feed.

There are two primary reasons for an early engagement – early in the game when timing is not quite right, and when you are losing the hit and you try to get in early to overcome this. I’ll put the offence in the first scrum of the game and the first scrum with replacement front rowers on the field down to the latter, even though the first scrum with the replacement front rowers was five metres out from the Wallabies’ goal line, which was a scrum in a real pressure situation. The second free kick for an early engagement came at a scrum after the Welsh had monstered the Wallabies scrum, which suggests that the Wallabies were looking for something extra to help them try and compete. The fact that the Welsh didn’t incur a free kick all match for an early engagement suggests that they were more confident of their scrum and could be more patient when it came to the engage. If you know you can afford to be slightly behind with the engage but still dominate the scrum you’re less likely to engage early and risk giving a free kick away.

The remaining four penalties the Wallabies conceded at scrums fed by the Welsh were as a result of Benn Robinson going to ground on one occasion and having his head and shoulders below his hips on another occasion, Sekope Kepu failing to hold the weight on one occasion, and Ben Alexander collapsing the scrum on one occasion. The last penalty awarded against Robinson could just as easily have gone against Alexander.

While the Wallabies scrum hasn’t been great in the first two Tests, in this match it was under enormous pressure. Some examples where the scrum was in trouble are shown in the following video.

I’m confused as to whether Patricio Noriega is still the Wallabies scrum coach or whether the forwards coach, Andrew Blades, has now taken over that role, but whoever’s in charge is going to have their work cut out for them prior to the commencement of The Rugby Championship as Argentina, New Zealand and South Africa all have strong scrums.

Discussion »

  • Dovester

    I bloody give up. Alexander is an atrocious scrummager. I thought Kepu and Robinson were the answer. Going to go and cry myself to sleep.

  • murph

    It’s odd that the scrum went to pieces so badly with a new lock combo…

    Regardless, Palmer is a better tighthead than Kepu (fact) and Slipper & Holmes are better replacement options than Alexander.

    Still, nothing will be done in either case

    • Mart

      “Still, nothing will be done in either case”

      How depressing is that. Speculation is futile. Deans gets his favourites and sticks with them.

      Alexanders scrummaging has been poor for a while. I’m still trying to erase the penalty try yellow card over in France a few years ago from my memory.

    • Barbarian

      You mention the new lock combo, but doesn’t the video pretty clearly show the scrum failure was a result of poor technique by the props?

      But I suppose any excuse to put the boot in hey.

      • murph

        My main point was about the front row not being the best at Australia’s disposal. The analysis may have focussed on the front row problems- that I don’t disagree with. But I find it quite amazing that, given the fact that the scrum was problematic in the front row, that Deans in his infinite wisdom, went and changed a component of scrum which definitely was rock solid.

  • Blinky Bill of Bellingen

    I want to take the time to thank Scott for a great job in trying to explain scrums to a former back (enough said on that).

    I’m not sure that I’ll ever completely get why Refs blow & penalise as I still reckon they’re guessing 1/2 the time.

    While I’m slowly getting to appreciate scrums & what makes a good’n, I’m stuffed if I can understand why the Wallaby scrum seems to go from reasonably good to poor in such a short time. And also why props are replaced at key moments in the game. Those things puzzle me.

  • johnny-boy

    I’ve concluded the Australian scrum is never going to cut it until TopoR is in charge. At least he couldn’t do any worse.

  • Barbarian

    The props had a bad game, but it isn’t the end of the world, nor is it time to drop the lot of them.

    The scrum held up pretty well in the first two games, and it is worth remembering this Welsh scrum destroyed all comers in the 6N and Jones and Jenkins are strong candidates for Lions spots.

    So it isn’t a disaster, just a speed bump. Hopefully we can learn from it and keep improving, as this scrum has certainly looked a fair bit better than last year with Kepu at 1 and Alexander at 3.

    • Scott Allen

      Sugest you re-watch the first two tests to refresh your memory – Wales had the clearly dominant scrum and just leaving things as they are will mean the Wallabies will not be able to compete at scrum time in TRC.

      Changes don’t have to be all selection based but whoever is selected, there needs to be a lot of work done on technique.

      Kepu at #1 and Alexander at #3 was terrible so anything’s an improvement over that.

      Palmer over Kepu and Moore over TPN would be positive steps in my opinion. Robinson still looks the best loosehead we’ve got.

      • Barbarian

        Yeah I wouldn’t argue too much with that. I said the scrum ‘held up OK’ in the first two games, with the key words being ‘held up’. It wasn’t totally destroyed and we won our own ball almost 100% of the time from memory.

        My point was we don’t need to demolish the whole scrum and rebuild. A couple of personell changes (TBH I don’t think the changes you suggest would prompt a radical improvement but it would probably be a small step forward) and some quality coaching (a much more challenging proposition) should stand us in good stead for TRC.

        • Scott Allen

          I’d have to say the operative word in your statement is OK – the Wallabies scrum did not hold up OK!

      • johnny-boy

        Spot on Scott. Let face it 90% of the time Alexander has been terrible but he couldn’t buy his way out of the Wallabies. Robinson does seem to be struggling a bit at the moment for him. He was outstanding a year or so ago. I hope his knee isn’t twinging. Moore is a world class hooker (one of the best) and TPN makes an ideal impact player. Hansen is the next obvious choice and Holmes is an ideal back up prop imo. I hate to say it being a Reds man but Slipper and Daley are crap. Tho Daley did surprise me for a while this year when he gave keeping his back straight a go.

      • Fatflanker

        Surprised Dingo passed up the opportunity to test Palmer in the third game. I’m not sure if we lack the basic strength to do the job or if other teams are just that much more street smart when it comes to pulling us down but you’d think after a decade of near-constant man-shaming we’d have sorted it by now. European scrum coach please.

    • muffy

      Barbarian.

      I appreciate and applaud what you have been doing over the last few blogs.

      But here I have to take issue. As a prop, I would cringe to read “held up pretty well in the first two games”. Front row is the only position where you actually contest directly man to man with your opposite. There is no middle ground, you win or lose. And frankly we lost.

      The guys in gold are meant to be the best scrummagers in Aus. Period

      It is not too much as the world’s number 2 side to expect to have at least the number 2 scrum. Yet for a while now we seem to settle for “holding our own”.

      We need… sorry… have to be dominant and we need our meat and potatoes on the field (thanks Nutta) or we will forever be on the wrong side of the whistle come scrum time, with our collective breath held. An d as much as I don’t like bagging players, the Bens are no longer the answer, they have simply been found out at international level.

      My three.. Kepu, Palmer and Slipper. Props first with genuine techniques… yet still good footballers around the ground, but …Props first.

      FFS this needs to be fixed.

      Whew, I feel better now

      • http://BigFella Big Fella

        Agree with your 3 props of Slipper (LH only), Kepu (TH starting) and Palmer.

        One of the tell tale signs of a good scrum is the lack of feet moving, unless they’re all going forward.

        Our scrum seems to have too many feet resetting and shuffling.
        The back 5 need to ensure that the position they find themselves in post hit, can be held.

        This particularly requires the Locks to maintain the ability to extend and retract their upper bodies via retaining some coil in their legs to adjust to movement, without shifting their feet.
        If their feet are wide enough they can also better compensate for any sideways movement that occurs.
        This is using core strength and why a smaller Lock like Brad Thorn is such a great scrummager.

        In some of the scrums on video you can see our Locks feet lift and move forward, and then immediately lift and move backwards.
        The domino effect destabilises the whole scrum.

        • Patrick

          I think everybody agrees that those are our props, with the possible inclusion of Slipper into the mix.

      • Barbarian

        Oh Muffy I think having a good scrum is vital. And I agree with everything you said… until you got to your players. What evidence is there that Slipper or Kepu can deliver the dominance you demand? Robinson is a proven test standard 1 and has been our most dominant scrummager of the past 10 years. He was a bit out of sorts this series but I don’t think it’s time to dispense with him just yet.

        I agree with Scott that Robinson-Moore-Palmer would be a good scrummaging front row, with Kepu on the bench.

        • JJJ

          Maybe Robinson needs to be dropped a while to rediscover his mojo. IIRC he credited being dropped by Ewen Mackenzie at the Tahs as the turning point when he decided to knuckle down and do what was required to be a great scrummager.

          I have to say though most of the scrums I’ve seen him really dominate the opposition tighthead he’s had a sneaky hand on the ground after the hit. It’s telling that in the scrum he gets monstered on the ref is standing right there so he can’t drop a hand to the ground. The scrum before that (no ref) he put a hand on the ground and was looking much stronger.

          He also seems to pop up at scrumhalf more than any player who isn’t Genia. I’m not sure if that’s a plan or just a sign that he isn’t getting stuck into the tight stuff enough.

          Overall I think that Noriega has shown he isn’t up to scrum coaching at the top level. I remember in a podcast interview Al Baxter was asked what the main difference was between Foley’s scrum coaching and Noriega’s. He said that Foley was more interested in the technique and Noriega was more interested in the attitude. Our props clearly need a coach who specialises in technique rather than attitude right now.

        • muffy

          Barb, Ben Rs technique (as JJJ points out) is a bit dodgy. He is always looking to get under his opposite if he gets away with it, well done and he’s fine, he does it very well at S15, but the Test boys have watched the tape and now play him at his own game (hence the binding on his arm… forcing him to engage below his hips… not coming on to him, catching him a bit off balance etc etc

          Don’t get me wrong, I love the “dark arts” but if it’s your main weapon, once its negated you’ve got nothing.

          Slip, Kep and Dan don’t use the “dark arts” as much, and I think that makes them better scrummagers. The other guys are forced to use the tricks against them, risking penalties and allowing (hopefully) the Wabs to gain ascendancy.

          The skulduggery can and will come later, and I look forward to that day…the time of the Gold Front Row Legend will be upon us

          After reading this back, I think can fairly expect a call from Robbie any moment, in fact I think I will hand in my notice at work now to save time..

  • Robson

    The video shows Robinson missing his bind in the first scrum, but he is, I believe, going for an illegal bind ie a loose hold on the front of the TH’s shirt. It’s a favourite technique of his because it allows him the freedom to slide his shoulders under the TH’s chest which he can’t do so easily if he is binding on the shoulder. Some of the scrum videos of his efforts against South Africa two seasons ago clearly show him using this technique.

    I wouldn’t want Robinson excluded from the side because I think he is basically a LH prop of international quality, but he has got a bit of work to do to sort himself out again.

    However the scrum as a whole is a bit of a nightmare at the moment and I’m at a loss to figure out where the gains of the last season and a half went to.

    And yes it would be good to know who exactly the scrum coach is. I thought it was Andrew Blades, but maybe not.

    • Scott Allen

      Great point re Foley and Noriega. Having observed both at live training sessions I would agree with how you classify them.

      I also believe that the main problem with the Wallaby scrum is technique.

      A mate who is Wallaby prop from the 80′s/90′s tells me when they came together attitude and timing was the big focus at Wallaby level because the technique work had been drummed into them before they even got there.

      It seems technique has gone out the window to a certain extent these days.

      Foley is big on technique and I think that’s why the Waratahs scrum has been quite dominant in 2012.

  • Chucka

    In the first two scrums Jones Binds directly onto Robinsons arm and, in the second one, the Ref is right there watching it happen!!! As a loosehead prop this realy pisses me off as the ref will always ping the loosehead for an Illegal bind but the tighthead gets away with it!!!

    • MrMouse

      I was going to say just that, Chucka.

      I’m also perplexed that Scott (who is by and large an excellent analyst) not only picked up on, but pointed out, Alexander’s arm bind yet let Jones’ slide…huh?

      I also actually think that the Welsh very effectively gamed us, and used the “slow engage” and only-just-sorta-not-really-taking-the-hit early on to really get in the heads of all 8 Wallaby piggies. I think they played us and the referee both brilliantly.

      • Scott Allen

        MM – I agree re the soft engage throughout the series. Think it was a definite tactic.

        Think the Welsh knew that if they didn’t get a free kick for an early engage, they could just push back through the Wallabies despite losing the hit. Nothing illegal about it and smart tactics but you have to be very confident of your scrum.

        On Jones bind, the first one does not get penalised these days. Despite what the law says, referees seem to let a bind under the armpit go. The second one is closer to a penalty but I think that would be penalised 2/10 times as it’s pretty close to the armpit.

        The difference with the Alexander bind is that he started where Jones ended up on the second scrum I showed and then continued to slide down the arm so that his bind ended up under the sleeve. That is normally penalised 8/10 times and should have been on this occasion.

        The interesting thing for me is that the Wallabies looked to be causing the re-sets on the Welsh scrum. Deliberate or not, I’m not sure, but no surprise given the pressure they were under.

      • Scott Allen

        MM – you are ahead of the game.

        Having just watched the IRB videos explaining the law variations and how laws will be interpreted next year they are going to police the tight head binding in accordance with the law.

        This would make all three binds in the video I showed illegal – no more binding under the armpit.

        I think that’s a good outcome.

        View this forum thread to link to the videos http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/community/threads/law-amendment-trials.11142/

  • mattyinred

    Interesting observation: we gave almost three times as many scrums as the Welsh. Keen to see how many are from the welsh calling after a short/long arm (can remember one or two) and how many were due to knock-ons.

    I agree our scrum isn’t up to scratch and needs work. With that being the case am interested to see how many were due to unforced handling errors etc – that is also a worrying statistic

    Doesnt help the scrum when we have a major case of the dropsies

  • DrewB

    I’m not a prop, so feel free to shoot me down here.

    It appeared to me in a number of scrums this whole series, whenever the wallabies seemed to win the hit and get a bit of a shove on, the welsh boys would fade or pull back and push us to deck, winning a penalty a number of times.

    Am I seeing things?

    • Scott Allen

      You weren’t seeing things – the Wallabies were going to ground but it wasn’t the Welsh pushing them down.

      What the Welsh obviously recognised was that if they conceded the hit they could still win the scrum anyway so I think they sat back and let the Wallabies come at them.

      They won a lot of free kicks against the Wallabies for early engagement and it was a no lose stategy for them – win a free kick or just push the wallabies back if no free kick came.

  • Trys NOT Kicks

    The Welsh have a bloody good scrum-not that it is an excuse but I think it needs to be taken in. In particular Jones is a monster-he is widely considered to be the best scrummager in his position in the NH, and as already pointed out this reputation allows him to get away with some fairly blatant fouls-for example binding on the arm IMO.

    Finally I am no prop but it has always been my view that when the front row folds it is because they have been forced to fold-I have nothing against penalties when I see a scrum dominating the opposition and forcing them back (but then why is a penalty required here?) but when a penalty is awarded when the scrum collapses I always feel that the both scrums must have an equal share of the blame? Again I am no prop.

    • Scott Allen

      There is an obligation on both packs to stay square and down.

      There is no obligation on the dominant pack to help the other pack out. That would be like saying, we have a centre playing today who doesn’t tackle well – can you go a little easy on him so it’s an even contest!

      One thing is certain – a dominant pack does not aim to take the scrum down – they want you to stay up so they can drive you backwards to demoralise you or score the pushover try. If a scrum collapses you could award the penalty to the dominant pack and be right >95% of the time.

      • Denis

        The biggest problem I see is that a dominant scrum knows it will get a penalty if the scum collapses, therefore it IS in their interest to pull the scrum down – and the weaker scrum is unable to prevent it. however if teh weaker scrum tried to pull it down the dominant scrum would have a chance to hold it up. I believe that by awarding penalties the ref’s are actually encouraging scrum collapses.

  • George B

    The set pieces are the foundations on which most teams build their game plans. We have never really bought into this concept for quite a while now, thinking that defence and flashes of backline brilliance will suffice. And it will, if we’re happy to stay no. 2. But it’s about time Robbie built us a scrum worthy of Mordor….and Australia, apologies for the geeky reference to Lord of the Rings.

    • Fatflanker

      Mordor…that would be NZ then?

  • JJJ

    I know Mike Cron travels NZ giving coaching clinics not only to s15 props but also to young aspiring props. Do we have anyone doing anything similar in Aus?

    It’s clearly a serious weakness in our game, and there’s no reason it should be given how many lower-ranked sides don’t have a problem with it. And given that it’s one of our major points of difference with League shouldn’t we be working to make sure it isn’t an embarrassment? Not much point telling a League follower that we have real manly scrums when we’re marched backwards or ground into the turf every time.

    I guess by “we” I mean JON.

  • Joe Blow

    The Welsh scrum in the 3rd test looked much more in sync than the Wallabies. They actually had an extra movement (arse up) just before the hit. All 8 seemed to be in tune with what was going on. The Wallaby 8 did not.
    This must be technique and training.
    I would also vote for a starting front row of Robinson, Moore & Palmer with Kepu and TPN on the bench. All 5 are regarded as good scrummagers.
    Doesn’t Moore run the Oz scum when he is on the paddock? We are probably missing Horwills input here a lot but I don’t think it is anything that cannot be turned around with the right coaching. The coach probably needs to take a look at the back 5, Higgers and Timani particularly, and make sure they are providing a solid platform for the front row.

  • NTA

    Fact: Australian rugby does not value the scrum at ANY level. If you’ve been playing prop since juniors, I can almost guarantee it is because the teams you played in got picked from 15 through to 1 in that order, and fat kids always get picked last.

    Fact: Benn Robinson is the best loosehead we’ve produced in the professional era.

    Fact: Jones handed Fat Cat his arse on the weekend by simple virtue of working harder and working smarter.

    Fact: Craig Joubert will look for any reason to penalise an Australian scrum (look at his vilification of a dominant Al Baxter a few years back), and his involvement is just one reason that the arm binds by the Welsh were not penalised.

    The culture around scrummaging can’t change easily in this country. Look at the evidence of our U20s recent performances: still picking the biggest fattest kids because they dominate our very shallow pool of technically adept props.

    We can at least correct the current generation – the forwards need to do the following:

    - work as a unit. if you want that ball, then push as an 8. I saw Higgers sticking his head up a few times.
    - front row bend your knees and hips – get lower, bind longer, drive harder
    - don’t give the ref an excuse

  • TSR

    Scott,
    It seemed to me that Robinson was high in his set up, which meant that when he was engaging he was hitting down rather than on the up.

    What are your thoughts on this? I know you mentioned he often hits with his shoulders below his hips. Is he just starting too high full stop?

    • Scott Allen

      Absolutely – as I said in the video it’s his hips that he needs to get lower. That needs to be achieved by more knee bend.

      If you can start low and stay low through the engage by moving forward, rather than up, you’re in a good position to dominate the scrum.

  • james

    God help Australia when they tour the UK in November with such a feeble scrum as they have at the moment.The truth is Wales should’ve won the series 2-1 and even though they didn’t there are no positives to be taken from the Wallabies performance despite the rubbish that is spoken by the media and Deans.For the sake of a handful of points Deans keeps his job when the truth is he should be sacked.I would imagine the Lions can’t wait for next year.

  • wallabyolly

    We’ve had to suffer a terrible scrum for far too long now,and lost alot of games unnesessarily ,especially to northern hemisphere sides,this cannot go on as the lions tour is looming ever closer,if deans carries on like this we will still be scrummaging poorly next season,and loose that series,its a huge embarrassment the thought that we haven’t hadz,decent platform since Rod Mcqueen was in power.,and the foundations he gave australian rugby have gone,if we had that platform we would be world beaters yet again.one question,who is going to answer me,where has salesi ma’afu gone,he could scrummage,because robinson and alexander look like slippery slipper!!!! also give us a chance of wiining the lions series by sacking dingo deans and giving us the Link!!!!

  • Red Beard

    Benn Robinson also needs to get his hand of his hip pre-engagment so he can punch that arm out 100 times quicker (and earlier) if he wants to get a decent bind.

  • Pingback: Wallabies – It’s Time For A Fightback! Part 2 - Green and Gold Rugby Blog

Close